Recognizing Emotions in Human Computer Interaction: Studying Stress Using Skin Conductance

  • Alexandros Liapis
  • Christos Katsanos
  • Dimitris Sotiropoulos
  • Michalis Xenos
  • Nikos Karousos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9296)


This paper reports an experiment for stress recognition in human-computer interaction. Thirty-one healthy participants performed five stressful HCI tasks and their skin conductance signals were monitored. The selected tasks were most frequently listed as stressful by 15 typical computer users who were involved in pre-experiment interviews asking them to identify stressful cases of computer interaction. The collected skin conductance signals were analyzed using seven popular machine learning classifiers. The best stress recognition accuracy was achieved by the cubic support vector machine classifier both per task (on average 90.8 %) and for all tasks (Mean = 98.8 %, SD = 0.6 %). This very high accuracy demonstrates the potentials of using physiological signals for stress recognition in the context of typical HCI tasks. In addition, the results allow us to move on a first integration of the specific stress recognition mechanism in PhysiOBS, a previously-proposed software tool that supports researchers and practitioners in user emotional experience evaluation.


Users emotional experience evaluation Physiological data Skin response conductance Physiological signal analysis 



This paper has been co-financed by the European Union (European Social Fund – ESF) and Greek National funds through the Operational Program “Education and Lifelong Learning” of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) (Funding Program: “Hellenic Open University”).


  1. 1.
    Chanel, G., Rebetez, C., Bétrancourt, M., Pun, T.: Emotion assessment from physiological signals for adaptation of game difficulty. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part Syst. Hum. 41, 1052–1063 (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vermeeren, A.P.O.S., Law, E.L.-C., Roto, V., Obrist, M., Hoonhout, J., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K.: User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. In: Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries. pp. 521–530. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ganglbauer, E., Schrammel, J., Tscheligi, M.: Possibilities of psychophysiological methods for measuring emotional aspects in mobile contexts. In: Proceedings of Mobile HCI (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mandryk, R.L., Atkins, M.S., Inkpen, K.M.: A continuous and objective evaluation of emotional experience with interactive play environments. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 1027–1036. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scheirer, J., Fernandez, R., Klein, J., Picard, R.W.: Frustrating the user on purpose a step toward building an affective computer. Interact. Comput. 14(2), 93–118 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koelstra, S., Muhl, C., Soleymani, M., Lee, J.-S., Yazdani, A., Ebrahimi, T., Pun, T., Nijholt, A., Patras, I.: DEAP: a database for emotion analysis; using physiological signals. IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput. 3, 18–31 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lin, T., Omata, M., Hu, W., Imamiya, A.: Do physiological data relate to traditional usability indexes? In: Proceedings of the 17th Australia Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Citizens Online: Considerations for Today and the Future. pp. 1–10. Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) of Australia, Narrabundah, Australia (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ward, R.D., Marsden, P.H.: Affective computing: problems, reactions and intentions. Interact. Comput. 16, 707–713 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lazar, D.J., Feng, D.J.H., Hochheiser, D.H.: Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction. Wiley, New York (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hernandez, J., Paredes, P., Roseway, A., Czerwinski, M.: Under pressure: sensing stress of computer users. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 51–60. ACM, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Healey, J.A., Picard, R.W.: Detecting stress during real-world driving tasks using physiological sensors. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 6, 156–166 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lunn, D., Harper, S.: Using Galvanic skin response measures to identify areas of frustration for older web 2.0 users. In: Proceedings of the 2010 International Cross Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A), pp. 34:1–34:10. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liapis, A., Karousos, N., Katsanos, C., Xenos, M.: Evaluating user’s emotional experience in HCI: the physiOBS approach. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCI 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8511, pp. 758–767. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Drachen, A., Nacke, L.E., Yannakakis, G., Pedersen, A.L.: Correlation between heart rate, electrodermal activity and player experience in first-person shooter games. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Video Games, pp. 49–54. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Russell, J.A., Weiss, A., Mendelsohn, G.A.: Affect Grid: a single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57, 493–502 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandros Liapis
    • 1
  • Christos Katsanos
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dimitris Sotiropoulos
    • 1
  • Michalis Xenos
    • 1
  • Nikos Karousos
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Science and TechnologyHellenic Open UniversityPatraGreece
  2. 2.Technological Educational Institute of Western GreecePatraGreece

Personalised recommendations